[jrubyc] respect Ruby visibility rules (do not generate private methods)#4570
Merged
[jrubyc] respect Ruby visibility rules (do not generate private methods)#4570
Conversation
Member
Author
Member
|
The question is whether the old behavior could be considered a feature by some, a feature that we are taking away. I don't feel that way though, so I am on board with including it. We may want to consider moving jrubyc to a preinstalled gem for 9.2, so it can be updated independently. |
Member
Author
|
OK ... I'm fine with leaving it for 9.2 as well - let's have @enebo to 🎱 for us |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
jrubyc --javageneration updated to be a little smarter - trying to respect Ruby's visibility rules....
private, protected, publicas well as theirprivate :method, ...counterparts now seamlessly 'work'private Ruby methods (without an explicit
java_signature '...'which is allowed to force generation) are no longer generated. also protected methods map to Java protected visibility by default.(kind of) resolves #4469 (still undecided about what to do with with
xxx?andyyy!methods)